General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFrances
(8,547 posts)to make a video of herself having sex and post it online so he and his followers could drool over the video?
TheWraith
(24,331 posts)Maher said that people should just accept the apology and let the thing drop.
Taverner
(55,476 posts)It's more like "Let's just give Limbaugh some more rope and point him to the rafters"
TheWraith
(24,331 posts)Maher is saying "Let's abandon the progress we've made this time, for the first time, in getting Limbaugh sent to Coventry."
Taverner
(55,476 posts)godai
(2,902 posts)LoZoccolo
(29,393 posts)Response to LoZoccolo (Reply #16)
Cali_Democrat This message was self-deleted by its author.
rsmith6621
(6,942 posts)...He is kinda a more R rated version of John Stewart.... He also is on Cable.
SO NO.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)But I agree he shouldn't be boycotted.
Neither should Limbaugh for that matter. It wouldn't do any good. How the hell would someone like me boycott rush limbaugh. I never listen to him in the first place so WTF is going to change. And that's true for most Democrats/"liberals". I agree that calling his sponsors is worthwhile but you gotta know there are plenty of bottom feeder companies just drooling at the chance to get an ad on his crappy show. If he had no sponsors at all the Koch bros. would keep him going just so he could keep oinking out his propaganda.
As far as Maher is concerned he has no sponsors to boycott. If you don't like him don't watch him.
Puregonzo1188
(1,948 posts)That's why he's on HBO now.
JackintheGreen
(2,036 posts)If Rush wants advertisers, he'd better stop it with the nip slips. If he thinks he can get a premium channel to pay him for his bilge, let him try. Not only did Maher do it, but so did Howard Stern.
itsrobert
(14,157 posts).
Bluerthanblue
(13,669 posts)that is the best way we have at our disposal to register our disaproval of what is being done.
It's the power of the people- Boycotts only succeed when the outrage wide-spread, and strongly supported.
Enrique
(27,461 posts)still_one
(92,422 posts)However, if you remember when Maher was on politically incorrect, which was commercial, he was boycotted and lost his show
backscatter712
(26,355 posts)The correct response is to use those two words, ignore the flying monkeys howling about Maher, and go right back to relentlessly attacking Limbaugh.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)Oh, right. His show is on pay cable. My bad.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)LoZoccolo
(29,393 posts)Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)it could be considered a TOS violation. In my opinion it should be.
RZM
(8,556 posts)Debate and discussion require looking closely at what the other side says. Occasionally, some people are going to agree with them. It doesn't happen often, but it does happen. While I don't see Maher and Limbaugh's sexist statements as exactly the same, the truth is that Maher has made some questionable statements in the past. And it's not like this is the first we've heard of this. There has been criticism of Maher on DU before - there are posters here who don't much care for him and have never been shy about saying that.
But now that Limbaugh's in trouble and the right is pointing the finger at Maher, those who don't approve of Maher should have posts hidden or possibly even tombstoned? That makes no sense. If it was ok to criticize Maher two years ago, why shouldn't it be ok to do so now? You shouldn't let what the right says determine what you think.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)RZM
(8,556 posts)I'm talking about your hostility to criticism of Maher because the right is doing it too. Maher has taken criticism from the left for a while now. That shouldn't change just because Rush Limbaugh is in trouble too.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)either deliberately or because they are clueless.
RZM
(8,556 posts)Like I said, criticism of Maher's statements about women on DU predates this particular talking point. So who cares if the right is criticizing him now too?
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)and numerous posts sprout up deflecting from rush to maher I will get rather pissed of at the people who, naively or otherwise, are helping out the cause. Because I despise the cause they are helping.
RZM
(8,556 posts)It's natural for DU to talk about Maher here. For one, like I said, it's a topic that's come up before. Two, it can get boring talking about Rush and only Rush. It's natural for people to contextualize things and move the topic in different directions.
Not everything that happens is because of what the right says and does. The left has it's own issues with Maher and right now, when the sexism of commentators is in the news, is a natural time for that to come back to the surface.
In fact, you could actually stand your argument on its head. Perhaps one of the reasons the right is singling out Maher is because they know that some on the left already had issues with him. You could argue that left-wing criticism of Maher is what made this 'talking point' viable in the first place.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)RZM
(8,556 posts)Isn't it a bit insulting to tell people who have legitimate concerns with Maher that they shouldn't be expressing those because the right is criticizing him too? It's also a bit self-important as well, as if you're entitled to lecture people on what they should or shouldn't be saying.
ProdigalJunkMail
(12,017 posts)at the behest of the right wind...the fact that he is, at times, a misogynistic pig couldn't possibly be the reason...
especially to some on this board...
sP
LoZoccolo
(29,393 posts)Zalatix
(8,994 posts)A lot of people should be wiping some egg off their faces after Bill Maher started defending Limbaugh's "apology".
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)There are just some people who seem to think women should always be exempt of being made fun of. Making fun of men is okay, to them, but mention a woman and a punchline and they throw a fit...
In all the years I've watched Bill Maher, I've seen him stand up for women's rights time and again, including the past few weeks, when he railed against the Republicans' intentions to regulate a woman's choice on abortion and contraception. To say he's sexist just because he makes jokes about women now and then is a bit ridiculous.
RZM
(8,556 posts)He referred to Sarah Palin as a 'cunt' and a 'dumb twat' in his stand up act. Is that sexist? I would probably say so. I can't say I'm particularly offended by those terms, but I acknowledge that some people are and I respect their feelings on the matter.
http://www.dallasvoice.com/maher-your-beautiful-theater-gonna-long-1070487.html
LoZoccolo
(29,393 posts)Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)You start a discussion, you get comments that you might not like.
Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #22)
LoZoccolo This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #22)
LoZoccolo This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #22)
LoZoccolo This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #22)
LoZoccolo This message was self-deleted by its author.
corkhead
(6,119 posts)I am going to be awfully lonely.
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)liberal N proud
(60,346 posts)That he calls out the lies and other atrocities perpetrated by the media and right?
LoZoccolo
(29,393 posts)Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)I don't watch HBO, so I don't watch Maher.
And I don't care for him, and never did.
He supported Nader in 2000, so I stopped watching him long before he was fired from that one show he had on ABC or CBS back in 2001.
madrchsod
(58,162 posts)plus rush has`t a clue about adult sexual relations
LoZoccolo
(29,393 posts)LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)What precedent is there in post-modern media to boycott a person who suggests his viewership accept an apology.
I imagine that whatever the answer(s) we find to that will imply at least one (of many) answers to your most sincere and genuine of queries.
LoZoccolo
(29,393 posts)LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)"Wouldn't there have to be a first precedent..."
As opposed to a second precedent?
LoZoccolo
(29,393 posts)emilyg
(22,742 posts)the c and B word/
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)Well, one time, but he was quoting somebody else. He was criticizing (get that, criticizing) the 1950's sitcoms in which men treated women like their subordinates. He was expressing amazement at how it was funny to audiences back then that Ralph Kramden would imply he was gonna beat his wife Alice if she didn't shut up. He was standing up for women in that instance (part of one of his stand-up routines), like he has been doing the past few weeks, against Republicans who want to control women's uteruses.
The B-word... well, he used it as much as he used the D-word (dick) for men, but nobody ever complains about that. It's okay to call men all kinds of shitty names (pig, swine, jackass, asshole), we all know that...
emilyg
(22,742 posts)use the c word.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)So you can keep the condescending tone to yourself.
It turns out he did. Was that tasteful and do I support it? No. Do I think that single instant automatically renders him a sexist and misogynyst? I don't.
emilyg
(22,742 posts)sounding condescening. He hates religion and women are not far behind. Peace.
Schema Thing
(10,283 posts)And I am, so no.
TheManInTheMac
(985 posts)godai
(2,902 posts)shcrane71
(1,721 posts)I really, really, really don't understand why Limbaugh hasn't been fined yet by the FCC. If Limbaugh wants to on a 9 hour tirade that demonizes a woman, he's more than free to do that on subscription stations. It's a completely different beast when someone is on broadcast stations, or am I just entirely missing something here?
madrchsod
(58,162 posts)in fact i watched about ten minutes and changed the channel.
countryjake
(8,554 posts)single, horny college girls wishing to engage in promiscuity?
Has Maher implied that women should NEVER have sex, unless they intend to reproduce?
Has Maher pretended that the left are hypocrites for expressing outrage over the blatant attack that right wing-nuts are waging against the women of this nation?
I've never watched Maher's program and I don't intend to, anytime soon, but no, a boycott of "Real Time" would not do much to stop the current steamrolling that Republicans are engaged in, in their drive to send Women's Rights back to the Stone Age.
Are YOU cool with vile mouthpieces of Rethug idealogy, like Limbaugh, Palin, or Beck, trying desperately to deflect criticism of their obvious war on women?
Dr. Strange
(25,925 posts)DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)Seriously, if I had to boycott Maher everytime I didn't agree with him...
I didn't agree with him on his initial stances on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict and Venezuela (he has come around on those) and I still don't agree with him on capital punishment, but why should we shut out everybody we don't agree with 100%?
sofa king
(10,857 posts)Of which there are none, but that will be a long and painful learning process for them.
phleshdef
(11,936 posts)Its one of the best political shows on television. Theres no way I'm gonna not watch it.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)and it has nothing to do with Limbaugh. I find him repulsive so I don't watch.
Kinda a shame, because I loved Religulous and agree with him on a lot of issues. I just find his humor to be not very humorous.
TheKentuckian
(25,029 posts)GeorgeGist
(25,323 posts)I boycott all of his sponsors.
MrSlayer
(22,143 posts)Besides, the only way to boycott is not to watch his show and I certainly will not be joining in that.
LoZoccolo
(29,393 posts)MrSlayer
(22,143 posts)It's grounds for me to say I think he's wrong but is not a boycott level offense.
TeamsterDem
(1,173 posts)bluedigger
(17,087 posts)I don't agree with his tweets re: Rush, but he has been on the receiving end of this sort of thing himself, and probably has a bit different perspective on it. I expect he will share that in more depth than tweets allow in the near future.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)I'm conflicted about whether or not to boycott him.
Iggo
(47,571 posts)Dammit.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)having sex?
Was Maher the defacto head of the Democratic Party at the time he said those things?
If so, then yes, he should be boycotted. If not, then no.
LoZoccolo
(29,393 posts)Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)And he's a bit sexist.
But he's not the one who did the deed, as they say. And he didn't say Limpballs was right in what he said. So, no, I wouldn't boycot him.
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)Maher is more of a leftist so his words and actions are excusable.
tsuki
(11,994 posts)Islandlife
(212 posts)Perhaps we are able to accept his vulgarities and ad homonem arguments because we hold Bill to a "lesser" standard of reporting.